|
|
|
|
|
|
by titzer
2560 days ago
|
|
|
> But little to substantiate the prosecution narrative recounted as fact by the NYT. I think you missed the part where they settled. > There is a reason Wal-Mart spent a billion dollars investigating this case but the government agreed to settle for less than $300 million—once prosecutors dug in, there wasn’t much of a story there. Wouldn't that rather suggest that they feared they could be liable for much, much more than a billion, and they jumped at the chance to make it all go away for just a "paltry" $300 million? |
|
|